English literature analysis[]
I am changing Smaug to the MOST prominent antogonist, for about 3/4 of the book smaug is the main focus of the book. Bolg only appears right at the end after Smaugs demise - 71.197.73.37 (talk) 13:06, 18 December 2013
- This is a Wikia about Lord of the Rings, not a literary review or a high school English class book report assignment, so discussing who the protagonists and antagonists are is not necessary -- in fact, please don't. And remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ when you post a comment on a Talk page like this. - Gradivus, 20:48, December 18, 2013 (UTC)
Spelling.[]
Not to be that kind of person but could you change armour into armor so it's correct :P
- "Armour" is how it's written in The Hobbit, being the correct English spelling. Bramblepath 10:35, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
Ah,sry then :P havn't read the hobbit in english yet so :/
- Right. Tolkien was British and so used British English spellings of words, and accordingly it is fitting that the Wikia entries should follow that custom. -- Gradivus, 15:22, November 5, 2012 (UTC).
Discussion of material from later Tolkien works[]
What is the relevance for discussing in the Smaug page whether the Dragon could destroy the One Ring? That information is from The Lord of the Rings; I don't believe the Rings of Power, or the fact that Bilbo's "lucky Ring" was one of them, was discussed in The Hobbit, in which case the discussion is not relevant here, and can be removed. --Gradivus, 15:06, December 12, 2012 (UTC)
I belive it is a good footnote, it helps establish the power of the ring, and the extent of the dragon's power, but the note section should be moved to the very bottom. TheDragonLord (talk) 22:16, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
nonono! Smaug was not the most prominent villain, Sauron was. Smaug might have been a dragon, but Sauron was like Lucifer. So listen, Sauron will always be stronger than Smaug.
Who else isn't very keen on the way Smaug has been created? He doesn't look very good, we all expected an amazingly edited Dragon with perfect scales and a crown of spikes coming from his head, but it's a little dissapointing. I hope they fix the way he looks before the film is released, but perhaps it's just the angle.
Was Smaug the last Dragon or could there be some still around into the Fourth Age and beyond? MongooseLover (talk) 03:18, October 20, 2013 (UTC)
Wealthy Smaug[]
I always have to laugh a little when I read about how "incredibly wealthy" the dragon Smaug was because of all his treasure. He may have a lot of shiny stuff, but as far as I'm concerned he had no wealth at all, because there was no place a dragon could go to spend any of it. He got himself a nice place to live, a pile of gold to lie upon, but when he got hungry he still had to get off his scaly butt and go hunt something to eat. - Gradivus, 00:33, December 9, 2013 (UTC)
Pictures of Smaug[]
I put up two pictures of Smaug from the 1977 film, but they were deleted. What was wrong with them? - Kurai the Tsukikage (talk) 13:06, 18 December 2013
- My apologies. I had removed them because you added a whole new gallery (there's already one) and in-between text lines, compromising some of our wiki standards. I have now added those 2 images to the correct gallery. Please pay attention to this next time and also remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ afterwards ;). Thank you. Winterz (talk) 18:21, December 18, 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't add a gallery, just a slideshow, and I put it in the text lines because I was trying to get it out of the way of the other pictures. Also I never learned how to sign. - Kurai the Tsukikage (talk) 8:17, 19 December 2013
Discussion of film continuity?[]
If this is really a discussion, like the header in his page suggests, shouldn't this be in the talk page section instead? — Darkchylde (talk • contribs) 05:23, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, and if there's no objection I'd be happy to do it. - Gradivus, 15:25, December 26, 2013 (UTC)
Should the part about Smaug having blue-hued scales be in the article? Because I'm quite sure that it's simply the lighting in the scene, especially because the scales that aren't in the shade are clearly red. It may look odd, but I'm pretty sure it's a quirk of the texture of Smaug's skin, not a glaring continuity error. Sevec 06:38, December 30, 2013 (UTC)
Pronoun[]
I would like to know why this page is using 'IT' as a pronoun for Smaug. In both the books and the films, Smaug was referred to as 'HE'. If there are no objections, I'm changing it. -- Smeagol630 (talk) 01:36, January 19, 2014 (UTC) --
The norwegian word for 'dragon' is 'drage' or 'drake', not 'drágë', the spelling (and subsequent) pronunciation is wrong..
Just thought you should know :)
88.91.241.97 23:19, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
Please change "decimating" to "destroying" in the summary. Decimate is a word that has been misused so long that some dictionaries are starting to accept the misuse, but in a context that honors Tolkein I hope we would all want to use language more carefully? The prefix deci- means one-tenth, and decimate means to kill off one-tenth of your own forces as a disciplinary measure. (If you don't believe me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_%28Roman_army%29 .) As written, the summary really says that Smaug destroyed less than one-tenth of Lake-town before Bard took him down.
98.183.231.8 13:32, May 30, 2016 (UTC)
An Alliance of Smaug and Sauron: A Conjecture[]
This is all conjecture.
In response to;
"The extended edition of the Desolation confirms Gandalf's fear of Smaug and Sauron working together as Thrain reveals. This explains his vast knowledge of Sauron and the Ring, as he alludes in the theatrical version. Precisely why he would join the Dark Lord is unclear, but it is possible that, despite his strength, the dragon does not have the power to fight Sauron with the One Ring along with his dark forces, while it is also possible that Smaug actually would compete in power with Sauron to some extent[19]. Furthermore, Sauron sent his armies to Erebor afterthe news of the Smaug's death had spread."
After, reading and listening to the audibook of The Silmarillion I wish to add possible continuity and to specifically answer "Precisely why he [Smaug] would join the Dark Lord is unclear" as a question.
Why would Smaug join Sauron in the War of the Ring?
In the Creation of Arda (The world) Eru brought forth the Valar (Powers) out of his thought.
The Chiefest Valar was Melkor (Later Morgoth) I.E. The First Dark Lord.
It was Morgoth whom created/summoned/bred the Dragons in the First Age Example: Glaurung
Smaug, being the decendent of Glaurung (The Father of all Dragons), owes his herritage to Melkor/Morgoth. Very similar to the common herritage of Ungoliant and Shelob the Spider
Sauron himself is a Maiar, originally made for Purpose and Order, that was corrupted by Morgoth to become his Leiutenant. A servant of Evil so to speak.
Now, Smaug. In the event that:
- the Quest to Erebor failed
- the Dragon was not slain
- And the Lonely Mountain claimed by the Gundabad Orcs and Smaug himself,
It would seem highly likely that Smaug and Sauron would Ally if not Smaug pledging himself to the Dark Lord fully. Think logically. Smaug needs food. He can Hibernate for long periods in time of fasting, but at the behest of Sauron he would have all the Elf, Dwarven, and Man Flesh he could eat. His Gold, jewels, and other various treasure would multiply through conquest.
Smaug, like Most other Hazzardous forces in Arda (Balrogs, Easterlings, Orcs) are the doings of Melkor in the Ainulindule (the Great Music) or were created during the War of Wrath and The War of the Silmarils during the First Age. Therefore theoretically Smaug would naturalally flock to the aid of Sauron in the War of the Ring as his natural tendicies were originally created by Melkor and Sauron is The Dark Lord Regent in place of Morgoth (who at this time is cast into the void.)
It is even spoken by Gandalf (In the Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug film adaptation by Peter Jackson) that Erebor and the Lonely Mountain are of particular attention to Sauron. Not only for the vast treasure horde. But of its strategic positioning. From Erebor Sauron could march his armies through Angmar and eventually the rest of Middle Earth and finally Arda itself. The fact that Sauron, in this parallel universe, would have Smaug as a servant and it would just add to the power of the Ring and his armies. It it Highly unlikely that Aragorn, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin, Legolas, Gimli, the Riders of Rohan a few thousand conscripts and whomever else participated at the Battle of the Black Gate would have survived against the Black Riders on Nazgul lead by Smaug the Impenetrable. Nor would it would have been as easy for Froddo Baggins and Samwise Gamgee to traverse Gorgoroth (Mordor Superior) with both Smaug and the Great Eye watching.
So to conclude; Smaug comes from Glaurung biologically and spiritually. Both of them are machinations of Morgoth. Sauron Serves Morgoth Therefore by chain of Command and Heirarchy Sauron would take the place of Morgoth and Smaug the place of Glaurung.
The Answer;
Smaug would most likely willingly serve Sauron had he lived because:
He needs food to survive.
Destruction is in his nature
Conquest and treasure are very important to him.
Smaug has a large Ego which can be played too for favor
A Dragon Supporting the Armies of Isengard and Mordor would be near unstoppable to the Alliance of Men, Elves, And Dwarves.
Sauron seeks Erebor for strategic purposes in the War of the Ring and is intelligent enough not to tempt the wrath of the dragon, but rather use
diplomacy and bribery as is the natural talent of Sauron the Deciever
Therefore an alliance or temporary truce between Smaug and Sauron would be inevitable in this alternate chain of events.
Thank you
Iroquoispliskin839 (talk) 12:16, February 14, 2018 (UTC)Iroquoispliskin839
I agree. SwtorPlayer (talk) 06:43, April 11, 2018 (UTC)
Servant of Morgoth and Sauron[]
The article is put in the category Servants of Morgoth. However, we hear that Smaug was young when he attacked Erebor, thus meaning he was either born in the late Second Age or the Third Age's beginning. Morgoth was the first Dark Lord and Sauron's dark mentor, but he lived in the First Age. Thus Smaug never served him, because he wasn't around at the time. (But to delve a little into speculation, Smaug could have been created in the same manner by Sauron as Morgoth created Glaurung, which would make him a servant of Sauron, however this is half fact-based speculation). Yet we might consider him Servant of Morgoth as one of his creatures and not soldiers or generals. But why is not then Smaug in the category Servants of Sauron as well? During the First Age, Sauron was Morgoth's protege, pupil, most trusted confident, chief lieutenant, right hand man and second-in-command, commander of Angband. He led the armies of Morgoth and all of his servants (and I suspect that he also commanded Gothmog the Lord of Balrogs, who seems to be similar to the Witch-King the Lord of the Nazgul). All of Morgoth's creatures: Orcs (also known as Goblins), Werewolves, Wargs, Trolls, Fire-drakes, Vampires (like Sauron's emissary Thuringwethil), Balrogs (at least then), Wraiths, Ghosts, and Dragons (Glaurung, Ancalagon the Black, Fire-drake of Gondolin). Sauron does not like the word ally. He simply doesn't. He was never Saruman's ally, but the one who helped him fall and secretly manipulated him. Everything Saruman was doing was ultimately in the Dark Lord's favor not his. And an alliance with a lesser servant of Morgoth like Smaug who isn't even a Maiar? No, that's too much. Rather a servant. Sauron is the heir of Morgoth, he is the new Dark Lord. More than half of Morgoth's creatures agree on that and obey him as they obeyed his mentor. Besides, aiding a master like Sauron brings you rewards (treasures, more gold, more shiny things, which Smaug really likes). So I will also include Smaug in that category as well.
"Protege, pupil, most trusted confidante, chief lieutenant, right hand man, second-in-command" You're going to amusingly great lengths to get a simple point across; those terms in this context mean the exact same thing. This isn't a place for speeches. HiddenVale - 
TalkPage 19:34, April 11, 2018 (UTC)
Mistake in translation[]
"In Slavic cultures, 'Smok' ("serpent") and 'Tsmok' ("sucker") have been used as aliases for "dragons"."
Hi, I just wanted to point out that "smok" in Polish literally means "dragon", not "serpent", which means "snake". Not to dive much into Polish folklore, where we use words like "żmij", "smok", "wij" or "wąż" as terms for naming folk reptiles but "serpent" is not the best translation for "smok". I saw there was a mistake on English Wikipedia from which this part was taken and I made the necesarry correction.